Platinum Contributing Member steve from amherst Posted March 21 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 21 It,s needed , but do it smart. Raise it one month per yr for 24 yrs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 9 minutes ago, steve from amherst said: It,s needed , but do it smart. Raise it one month per yr for 24 yrs A far more equitable path forward...maybe a little faster. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry ginger Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 SS is designed for a short window of time. letting the average person collect for twice as long as designed isn't going to work. it's already been an increasing number so tying it in with real data would not be a bad thing. they should also do that with other things like min wage rather than waving some 15/hr flag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 21 Author Share Posted March 21 1 minute ago, Angry ginger said: SS is designed for a short window of time. letting the average person collect for twice as long as designed isn't going to work. it's already been an increasing number so tying it in with real data would not be a bad thing. they should also do that with other things like min wage rather than waving some 15/hr flag. My age group was the first to get hit with raising the retirement age. And that’s fine. While I think SS is a terrible method for investment, it’s a necessary evil in society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Posted March 21 Share Posted March 21 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Angry ginger said: SS is designed for a short window of time. letting the average person collect for twice as long as designed isn't going to work. it's already been an increasing number so tying it in with real data would not be a bad thing. they should also do that with other things like min wage rather than waving some 15/hr flag. None of it works, in reality. Our CCP or Canada Pension Plan is nothing of the sort. It's a welfare scheme, funded by working taxpayers....again. You only need be in Canada for 10 years...you don't have to work a day in your life to claim benefits. Edited March 21 by Voodoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted March 26 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 26 On 3/21/2024 at 8:59 AM, ActionfigureJoe said: Leave it to Regan to tax social security while slashing tax rates on the wealthy and corporate America. Wasn't just Reagan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 26 Author Share Posted March 26 1 minute ago, Highmark said: Wasn't just Reagan. He signed the bill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted March 26 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 26 15 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said: He signed the bill. Yes he did on 50% of the income.....then came Clinton/Gore. Q4. Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities? A4. In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income. This change in the tax rate was one provision in a massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) passed that year. The OBRA 1993 legislation was deadlocked in the Senate on a tie vote of 50-50 and Vice President Al Gore cast the deciding vote in favor of passage. President Clinton signed the bill into law on August 10, 1993. (You can find a brief historical summary of the development of taxation of Social Security benefits on the Social Security website.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted March 26 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 26 (edited) 19 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said: He signed the bill. Effective tax rates for the wealthy went up under Reagan. People like you can't comprehend that income tax rates really don't mean all that much. Need to look at the whole picture. Edited March 26 by Highmark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crnr2Crnr Posted March 26 Share Posted March 26 this could be simply and easily rectified if the boomers would just.... KILL THEMSELVES!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted March 26 Author Share Posted March 26 56 minutes ago, Highmark said: Yes he did on 50% of the income.....then came Clinton/Gore. Q4. Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities? A4. In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income. This change in the tax rate was one provision in a massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) passed that year. The OBRA 1993 legislation was deadlocked in the Senate on a tie vote of 50-50 and Vice President Al Gore cast the deciding vote in favor of passage. President Clinton signed the bill into law on August 10, 1993. (You can find a brief historical summary of the development of taxation of Social Security benefits on the Social Security website.) It’s never the GOP’s fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted March 26 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 26 2 minutes ago, ActionfigureJoe said: It’s never the GOP’s fault. Sure it is. Takes two to tango most of the time. Just with them its less often and for less money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry ginger Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 On 3/21/2024 at 1:07 PM, ActionfigureJoe said: My age group was the first to get hit with raising the retirement age. And that’s fine. While I think SS is a terrible method for investment, it’s a necessary evil in society. i completely agree. i certianly would have been better off investing my own money but i am a saver. most would have just spent it and ended up with nothing just like the rest of their retirement savings. Amazing how many people i see at work when i get statements who have less than 50k at 50+ years old in their retirement and these aren't people with pension plans. then they are taking out 30 year loans so they are having to work till they are dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snoughnut Posted April 2 Share Posted April 2 19 minutes ago, Angry ginger said: i completely agree. i certianly would have been better off investing my own money but i am a saver. most would have just spent it and ended up with nothing just like the rest of their retirement savings. Amazing how many people i see at work when i get statements who have less than 50k at 50+ years old in their retirement and these aren't people with pension plans. then they are taking out 30 year loans so they are having to work till they are dead. I read recently that approximately 30% of adults in America have nothing saved for retirement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Steve753 Posted April 2 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted April 2 48 minutes ago, Angry ginger said: i completely agree. i certianly would have been better off investing my own money but i am a saver. most would have just spent it and ended up with nothing just like the rest of their retirement savings. Amazing how many people i see at work when i get statements who have less than 50k at 50+ years old in their retirement and these aren't people with pension plans. then they are taking out 30 year loans so they are having to work till they are dead. I keep hearing that it's ok to work until you die as long as you enjoy what you're doing. If the person who says that is debt free thats one thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member ViperGTS/Z1 Posted April 3 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted April 3 3 hours ago, Steve753 said: I keep hearing that it's ok to work until you die as long as you enjoy what you're doing. If the person who says that is debt free thats one thing. Yup.... it's fine . ....I actually thought about going back to work but it would be like starting over. Would lose all my seniority ...Back to starting wages with a 5 year progression to where I had retired at. And only 1 Week vacation....where I used to have 7. Plus I would go back to being a split driver doing different routes. My regular route is long gone and I would have no seniority to get it back. So retirement it shall be.. I suppose I'll get used to it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 5 hours ago, Steve753 said: I keep hearing that it's ok to work until you die as long as you enjoy what you're doing. If the person who says that is debt free thats one thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted April 3 Author Share Posted April 3 (edited) 1 hour ago, ViperGTS/Z1 said: Yup.... it's fine . ....I actually thought about going back to work but it would be like starting over. Would lose all my seniority ...Back to starting wages with a 5 year progression to where I had retired at. And only 1 Week vacation....where I used to have 7. Plus I would go back to being a split driver doing different routes. My regular route is long gone and I would have no seniority to get it back. So retirement it shall be.. I suppose I'll get used to it. I talked to an old guy at Mesa Verde NP this afternoon who works for the National Parks Dept. He retired from UPS and carries a 20 year Army pension. He went nuts. He told me about forestry, BLM, and NP jobs. He said the feds can't fill them. He said there's 5,000 openings with very few applicants.I thought were are all the Gen Z's? I'm going to look into a BLM job when I turn 67. Settled into a New Mexico dispersed camp site for the evening. Even has 5G. Windy and chilly. Great sleeping weather with the wind howling up from the valley. Edited April 3 by ActionfigureJoe 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.